1912.] NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA. 331 



least one experimenter, Lieut. -Col. Neville Manders, has done so. 

 Manders himself says: "I am extremely doubtful as to any real 

 value accruing from experiments on caged birds, whether nestlings or 

 adult. No one, I imagine, believes that all butterflies taste alike; 

 no doubt some are more tasty than others, and caged birds fed upon 

 butterflies, even with other insect food, would no doubt learn in 

 time to distinguish the different kinds ; but this procedure to my mind 

 begs the question, as it assumes that butterflies are an ordinary 

 article of food in the wild state, a proposition .... which the 

 evidence .... does not altogether support." 81 It is noteworthy 

 that the free birds Manders did induce to take disabled butterflies 

 were not seen by him to attack these insects under normal con- 

 ditions. He frequently comments (pp. 736-739, 741) on this fact. 

 Although the birds ate the helpiess butterflies, they took no notice 

 of the freely flying ones that abounded in the vicinity. 



The wild birds experimented upon in Ceylon by Manders, with 



their records, are as follows: (Disregarded — D. — means simply 



not taken and not tried. Behavior toward dead butterflies not 



noted) . 



Nauseous Palatable 



group. group. 



A. R. D. A. R. D. 



Robin flycatcher, Siphia hyperythra 2 2 6 1 



Dusky-blue " Stoparola sordida 7 2 4 



Brown shrike, Lanius cristatus 4 7 4 5 



Magpie robin, Copsychus saularis. ... 10 3 4+ 21+0 6 



Mynah, Acridotheres tristis 110 1 5 1 



34 3 14+ 38+ 17 



Thus there were no refusals (upon trial) of any living butterflies 

 except by the magpie robin. This bird has three rejections, two of 

 Euplcea core, one of which it ate immediately afterwards. The 

 bird's record with this butterfly was A 9 R 2. Manders says the 

 other butterfly (Terias hecabe) refused by this species was too dry. 

 The percentage of insects disregarded is practically the same for the 

 "nauseous" and the "palatable" groups. Manders' conclusion from 

 this and other evidence is that "the terms palatable and unpalatable 

 are not justified at present" (I.e., p. 742). 



Experiments in America. 

 Unfortunately, the natural food habits of many of the Indian, 



81 Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., September, 1911, p. 745. 



